SUBSCRIBE:

U.S. National Security Agency spying on millions of Americans

Share

Today, 6 June 2013, the Guardian newspaper confirmed what EFF (and many others) have long claimed: the National Security Agency (NSA) is conducting widespread, untargeted, domestic surveillance on millions of Americans. This revelation should end, once and for all, the government's long-discredited secrecy claims about its dragnet domestic surveillance programs. It should spur Congress and the American people to make the President finally tell the truth about the government's spying on innocent Americans.

In a report by Glenn Greenwald, the paper published an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or FISC) that directs Verizon to provide “on an ongoing daily basis” all call records for any call “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls” and any call made “between the United States and abroad.”

In plain language: the order gave the NSA a record of every Verizon customer's call history -- every call made, the location of the phone, the time of the call, the duration of the call, and other “identifying information” for the phone and call -- from April 25, 2013 (the date the order was issued) to July 19, 2013. The order does not require content or the name of any subscriber and is issued under 50 USC sec.1861, also known as section 215 of the Patriot Act.

There is no indication that this order to Verizon was unique or novel. It is very likely that business records orders like this exist for every major American telecommunication company, meaning that, if you make calls in the United States, the NSA has those records. And this has been going on for at least 7 years, and probably longer.

This type of untargeted, wholly domestic surveillance is exactly what EFF, and others, have been suing about for years. In 2006, USA Today published a story disclosing that the NSA had compiled a massive database of call records from American telecommunications companies. Our case, Jewel v. NSA, challenging the legality of the NSA's domestic spying program, has been pending since 2008, but it's predecessor, Hepting v. AT&T filed in 2006, alleged the same surveillance. In 2011, on the 10th Anniversary of the Patriot Act, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records about the government's use of Section 215 – the legal authority the government was relying on to perform this type of untargeted surveillance.

But at each step of the way, the government has tried to hide the truth from the American public: in Hepting, behind telecom immunity; in Jewel, behind the state secrets privilege; in the FOIA case, by claiming the information is classified at the top secret level. In May 2011, Senator Ron Wyden, one of the few courageous voices fighting against the government's domestic surveillance program, said this in a debate about reauthorizing Section 215:

"I want to deliver a warning this afternoon: when the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry."

Today is that day. The American people have confirmed how the government has secretly interpreted Section 215. And we're angry. It's time to stop hiding behind legal privileges and to come clean about Section 215 and FISA. It's time to start the national dialogue about our rights in the digital age. And it's time to end the NSA's unconstitutional domestic surveillance program.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

What other IFEX members are saying

PEN American Center President Peter Godwin called the surveillance “a shocking intrusion” that “underscores our worst fears that the U.S. government has veered off the rails in its understanding of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Reporters Without Borders calls on the US Congress to create a commission of enquiry into the links between US intelligence agencies and nine leading Internet sector companies that are alleged to have given them access to their servers. The commission should also identify all the countries and organizations that have contributed to the mass digital surveillance machinery that (...) the US authorities have created.

Which companies stand with their users, embracing transparency around government data requests? Which companies have resisted improper government demands by fighting for user privacy in the courts and on Capitol Hill? In short, which companies have your back?

"Congressional efforts in 2012 to adopt legislation to prevent copyright infringement on the Internet were shelved in response to strong opposition from leading Internet companies, websites, and ordinary users"

Digital Rights:

More from Digital Rights

Internet freedom has declined for the sixth consecutive year, with more governments than ever before targeting social media and communication apps as a means of halting the rapid dissemination of information, particularly during anti-government protests.

This publication presents the findings of the media development assessment in Mongolia that began in 2012 to determine the state of the media in the country. The assessment was based on the UNESCO/IPDC Media Development Indicators (MDIs), an internationally recognized analytical tool used to provide detailed overviews of national media landscapes and related media development priorities.

The report features present FoE practices on internet in Nepal and analyses existing policy, laws and constitution affecting the practice of freedom of expression. It seeks to advance the debate on this topic, thereby augmenting digital rights to make democracy's pillars more sustainable and more functional.

The report is a frank assessment of the recent regime of online censorship and mass surveillance against a backdrop of longstanding, serious abuses of the judicial process and attacks on freedom of expression by Turkish authorities.

The report surveys the rocky landscape for media and public discourse since the ruling military junta lifted the curtain on the southeast Asian nation in 2012 after five decades of isolation from the modern world.

The Cross Community Working Party on ICANN’s Corporate and Social Responsibility to Respect Human Rights (CCWP-HR) prepared this paper for presentation and discussion at ICANN54 in Dublin in October 2015. This paper is intended to build on and complement the previous reports published by the Council of Europe and ARTICLE 19 on ICANN’s responsibility to respect human rights.

The Pakistani government has significantly expanded its communication interception activities. This Privacy International report covers the intelligence services plan to capture all IP-traffic in Pakistan and other initiatives, pointing to gaps in the laws governing surveillance.

What is the correlation between the online and offline behaviour of Iranian citizens and the likelihood of their arrest in Iran today? Answering this question is the main focus of this new ARTICLE 19 report.

The need to regulate the transfer of surveillance technologies that pose a risk to human rights has been largely recognised by EU institutions and some EU member states. It is no longer a question of if the EU should do more in this area, but how.

Cambodian Internet users overwhelmingly see the country’s Internet as increasingly becoming more accommodating of free expression but remain concerned about the effects of recently proposed government actions related to Internet surveillance and controls, according to the results of a study by CCIM, which surveyed almost 1,000 Cambodian Internet users from 22 provinces.

IFEX publishes original and member-produced free expression news and reports. Some member content has been edited by IFEX. We invite you to contact [email protected] to request permission to reproduce or republish in whole or in part content from this site.